Literature DB >> 26975446

The influence of frequency-dependent hearing loss to unaided APHAB scores.

J Löhler1,2, B Akcicek3, B Wollenberg4, T Kappe5, P Schlattmann6, R Schönweiler7.   

Abstract

Hearing loss can be measured by pure-tone and speech audiometry. The subjective hearing impairment can be assessed using questionnaires. The APHAB determines this for four typical hearing situations. It has not been researched previously whether a particular frequency-specific hearing loss leads to a particular unaided APHAB score in one of the subscales or not. Clarification could be helpful using the unaided APHAB as an instrument for primary diagnostics of hearing loss independently of whether hearing aids were subsequently fitted or not. A total of 4546 records from a database were analysed; the average age of the subjects was 69.3 years. Using a multivariant mixed linear model, a possible correlation was examined between a frequency-specific hearing loss (0.5-8.0 kHz) and particular unaided APHAB scores for its subscales. Furthermore, it was determined whether the subject's gender has a corresponding impact. There was no evidence of gender-specific dependence of the unaided APHAB scores. For the EC scale frequencies above 0.5 kHz, for the RV scale all frequencies and for the AV scale the frequencies at 1.0 and 2.0 kHz showed a significant correlation between hearing loss and the APHAB score. For each decibel of hearing loss there was an average rise in the APHAB score for the EC and RV scale of approximately 0.2 percentage points and an average decrease in the AV scale of 0.1 percentage points for each frequency. For the BN scale there was no evidence of this kind of correlation. The very varied possibility between individuals compensating for hearing loss in situations with background noises could be that there is no correlation between frequency-specific hearing loss and an associated unaided APHAB score. The described frequency-specific influence of hearing loss to the EC and RV score could be explained by fewer compensating possibilities for the patients in these specific hearing situations than for the BN scale described. Using the unaided APHAB form in primary diagnostics of hearing impairment is helpful for understanding individual problems.

Entities:  

Keywords:  APHAB; Hearing loss; Pure-tone audiometry; Questionnaire; Unaided APHAB

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26975446     DOI: 10.1007/s00405-016-3966-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol        ISSN: 0937-4477            Impact factor:   2.503


  20 in total

1.  Subjective vs. objective intelligibility of sentences in listeners with hearing loss.

Authors:  K M Cienkowski; C Speaks
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 2.297

2.  Audiometric correlates of the unaided APHAB.

Authors:  Robyn M Cox; Genevieve C Alexander; Ginger A Gray
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 1.664

Review 3.  Fundamental issues in self-assessment of hearing.

Authors:  R L Schow; S Gatehouse
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  1990-10       Impact factor: 3.570

4.  Personality and the subjective assessment of hearing aids.

Authors:  R M Cox; G C Alexander; G Gray
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 1.664

5.  Self-reported hearing handicap and audiometric measures in older adults.

Authors:  T L Wiley; K J Cruickshanks; D M Nondahl; T S Tweed
Journal:  J Am Acad Audiol       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 1.664

6.  [Implementation of the new quality assurance agreement for the fitting of hearing aids in daily practice. Part 2: New diagnostic aspects of speech audiometry].

Authors:  J Löhler; B Akcicek; B Wollenberg; R Schönweiler
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 1.284

7.  The relationship between audiometric and self-report measures of hearing handicap.

Authors:  S H Brainerd; B G Frankel
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  1985 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.570

8.  [Development and use of an APHAB database].

Authors:  J Löhler; B Akcicek; T Kappe; P Schlattmann; B Wollenberg; R Schönweiler
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 1.284

9.  [Results of clinical use of the German version of the APHAB].

Authors:  J Löhler; L Moser; D Heinrich; K Hörmann; L E Walther
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 1.284

10.  Comparison between self-reported hearing and measured hearing thresholds of the elderly in China.

Authors:  Mingfang Diao; Jianjun Sun; Tao Jiang; Fangjie Tian; Zhonghong Jia; Yang Liu; Donglan Chen
Journal:  Ear Hear       Date:  2014 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.570

View more
  8 in total

1.  [Dependency of APHAB score in the ECu subscale on age, gender and subjective hearing loss : Hearing aid fitting in two subjective hearing loss groups].

Authors:  J Löhler; O Wegner; B Wollenberg; R Schönweiler
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 1.284

2.  [APHAB scores for individual assessment of the benefit of hearing aid fitting].

Authors:  J Löhler; B Wollenberg; R Schönweiler
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2017-11       Impact factor: 1.284

Review 3.  Hearing aids: indications, technology, adaptation, and quality control.

Authors:  Ulrich Hoppe; Gerhard Hesse
Journal:  GMS Curr Top Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2017-12-18

4.  Sensitivity and specificity of the abbreviated profile of hearing aid benefit (APHAB).

Authors:  Jan Löhler; F Gräbner; B Wollenberg; P Schlattmann; R Schönweiler
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2017-07-29       Impact factor: 2.503

5.  Associations between the probabilities of frequency-specific hearing loss and unaided APHAB scores.

Authors:  J Löhler; B Wollenberg; P Schlattmann; N Hoang; R Schönweiler
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2016-11-17       Impact factor: 2.503

6.  Clinical Performance, Safety, and Patient-Reported Outcomes of an Active Osseointegrated Steady-State Implant System.

Authors:  Robert Briggs; Catherine S Birman; Nicholas Baulderstone; Aaran T Lewis; Iris H Y Ng; Anna Östblom; Alex Rousset; Sylvia Tari; Michael C F Tong; Robert Cowan
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2022-08-01       Impact factor: 2.619

7.  Potential Consequences of Spectral and Binaural Loudness Summation for Bilateral Hearing Aid Fitting.

Authors:  Maarten van Beurden; Monique Boymans; Mirjam van Geleuken; Dirk Oetting; Birger Kollmeier; Wouter A Dreschler
Journal:  Trends Hear       Date:  2018 Jan-Dec       Impact factor: 3.293

8.  [Correlation between the APHAB questionnaire and the Freiburg monosyllabic test without + with noise].

Authors:  Jan Löhler; Mathias Sippel; Leif Erik Walther; Rainer Schönweiler
Journal:  Laryngorhinootologie       Date:  2021-06-22       Impact factor: 1.057

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.